What Stats Are Automatic?

League-related polls only (use OT Forum for OT polls).

Which stats do you feel are an automatic HOF vote

3,000 Hits
12
27%
500 Homeruns
8
18%
1,500 RBI
2
5%
1,500 Runs Scored
1
2%
250 Wins
8
18%
3,500 Strikeouts
7
16%
700 Saves
6
14%
 
Total votes: 44

User avatar
7teen
BBA GM
Posts: 9806
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 7:59 am
Has thanked: 223 times
Been thanked: 1135 times

What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by 7teen » Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:40 pm

In one of my TNs, Mick's homerun count brought up a topic I've been floating around in my own head now for a while and how the league votes on issues. So the topic is: Which (if any) of these stats are an automatic vote for the HOF in the BBA.

Obviously these are old school numbers not the new age ones. Just throwing this topic out there to see what people think.

For what it's worth, we have guys with more than some of these listed not in the HOF currently. Just wanting to know if some of YOU think these are automatic votes for you regardless of other stats.
Chris Wilson

LB Surfers 95-96
FL Pac Champs: 95

Madison Wolves 99-2039
JL MW: 99-2009, 17, 20, 21
JL WC: 12
JL: 01, 04, 09, 12
FL Heartland: 32
FL WC: 31, 33
BBA Champs: 04, 09

Portland Lumberjacks 2040-
FL Pacific: 50
FL WC: 49, 51
FL Champs: 49, 51

Vic Caleca TN of the Year 2046

agrudez
Ex-GM
Posts: 7681
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:30 am
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by agrudez » Fri Apr 19, 2019 2:21 pm

None of the above.

Of the selections, 3000 hits probably has the closest correlation, though. I can't imagine too many scenarios where a player had 3000 hits and was so poor in every other facet of the game that he wasn't hall worthy. He'd have to be an empty average 1B/DH or something.

On the other end, 500 HRs feels like the one with the least correlation. In fact, I can recall at least a handful of 1B/DH off the top of my head on recent ballots that had close to or >500 HRs and I didn't vote for them because the power is all they had.

Of course, that is of the stats that actually are representative of a player's contribution more than his team's ability. I am immediately discounting RBIs, Runs, Saves and Wins before I even start the discussion.
League Director: Kyle “agrudez” Stever*
*Also serves as chief muckraker
-Ron, 2025 media guide

Image

Ted
Ex-GM
Posts: 5630
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:50 pm
Has thanked: 368 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by Ted » Fri Apr 19, 2019 3:48 pm

agrudez wrote:
Fri Apr 19, 2019 2:21 pm
None of the above.

Of the selections, 3000 hits probably has the closest correlation, though. I can't imagine too many scenarios where a player had 3000 hits and was so poor in every other facet of the game that he wasn't hall worthy. He'd have to be an empty average 1B/DH or something.

On the other end, 500 HRs feels like the one with the least correlation. In fact, I can recall at least a handful of 1B/DH off the top of my head on recent ballots that had close to or >500 HRs and I didn't vote for them because the power is all they had.

Of course, that is of the stats that actually are representative of a player's contribution more than his team's ability. I am immediately discounting RBIs, Runs, Saves and Wins before I even start the discussion.
Pretty much with you on this. You can get almost all of those things without being HOF worthy. It's unlikely but possible. And I agree, 3000 hits is the hardest to do without being deserving because someone would have to give you enough PT, and you'd have to hit only singles at a position where that's a poor performance. Also agree on the power thing. I could have run Cris Vazquez out there the last three years in an attempt to get him to 500 homers. It might have even worked. And there's no way he's a hall of famer. You could replace his last two seasons with peak Cricket seasons, and he'd still only have like 20 WAR.

It's weird to say that none of these numbers are automatic. I think that's partially because we've all been taught they are, but also partially because video game baseball can give you some weird player types and careers that just don't really happen in real life.

Now, game winning RBI, THERE's a stat that matters! :doh:
Ted Schmidt
Twin Cities Typing Nightmares(2044-present)
California Crusaders (2021-2038)
Image

User avatar
7teen
BBA GM
Posts: 9806
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 7:59 am
Has thanked: 223 times
Been thanked: 1135 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by 7teen » Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:32 am

Here's a follow up on how these stats look in our league...

18 Players have 3,000 hits. All 18 are in the Hall of Fame
19 Players have hit 500 homeruns. All 19 are in the Hall of Fame
31 Players have 1,500 RBI. 26 are in the Hall of Fame. 1 Still Active
31 Players have 1,500 Runs. 30 are in the Hall of Fame
8 Players have 250 Wins. All 8 are in the Hall of Fame
11 Players have 3,500 Strikeouts. 6 are in the Hall of Fame. 1 Still Active
1 Player has 700 Saves. He's in the Hall of Fame.

My whole reason for this has been looking at Dusty Rhodes and Steve Dempsey. Both are likely going to reach 3,000 hits in their career while not posting a WAR over 35. So it could really bring in to focus how the old school counting numbers are looked at compared to the newer ones. But up to this point, it appears that as a league we have voted guys in who have reached most of these milestones with the exception of strikeouts. We don't seem to think highly of a pitchers ability to strike-out a lot of guys when looked at individually.
Chris Wilson

LB Surfers 95-96
FL Pac Champs: 95

Madison Wolves 99-2039
JL MW: 99-2009, 17, 20, 21
JL WC: 12
JL: 01, 04, 09, 12
FL Heartland: 32
FL WC: 31, 33
BBA Champs: 04, 09

Portland Lumberjacks 2040-
FL Pacific: 50
FL WC: 49, 51
FL Champs: 49, 51

Vic Caleca TN of the Year 2046

Ted
Ex-GM
Posts: 5630
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:50 pm
Has thanked: 368 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by Ted » Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:23 am

7teen wrote:
Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:32 am
Here's a follow up on how these stats look in our league...

18 Players have 3,000 hits. All 18 are in the Hall of Fame
19 Players have hit 500 homeruns. All 19 are in the Hall of Fame
31 Players have 1,500 RBI. 26 are in the Hall of Fame. 1 Still Active
31 Players have 1,500 Runs. 30 are in the Hall of Fame
8 Players have 250 Wins. All 8 are in the Hall of Fame
11 Players have 3,500 Strikeouts. 6 are in the Hall of Fame. 1 Still Active
1 Player has 700 Saves. He's in the Hall of Fame.

My whole reason for this has been looking at Dusty Rhodes and Steve Dempsey. Both are likely going to reach 3,000 hits in their career while not posting a WAR over 35. So it could really bring in to focus how the old school counting numbers are looked at compared to the newer ones. But up to this point, it appears that as a league we have voted guys in who have reached most of these milestones with the exception of strikeouts. We don't seem to think highly of a pitchers ability to strike-out a lot of guys when looked at individually.
I think there are two things going one here. First, we've been around awhile, and much of the early HOF is based more on traditional voting patterns than sabermetric stuff. In fact, I'd bet that we still are fairly evenly split as far as "old school" versus "new school" voting standards.

The other, and perhaps more important matter, it that's it's just really hard to get to any of those numbers without being one of the very best players. I (and I believe Kyle) were more making the point that the totals themselves should not be the main factor in getting into the hall. The overall level of play should. We can all imagine players who can get to many if not all of these totals and simply not be good players. Those hypothetical cases many be exceptionally unlikely, but could happen.

I pointed out a guy like Vazquez as an example of someone who could have reached one of these "Automatic" numbers and wouldn't be deserving. A perhaps better example is Jim Wilson. Wilson was a controversial candidate. I pushed for him pretty hard at the time, based on his 530 homers and .903 OPS. In hindsight, I don't know that I'd vote for him again. He was one of the worst fielders in league history. He was a DH for the second half of his career. .340 OBP is not really HOF caliber for an atrocious fielder/DH. He was a one franchise guy, and a very good hitter. Still, 43 WAR is NOT a hall of fame total. On the other hand, WAR is just another counting stat. It happens to be one that is more well rounded and takes into account the entire player. I tend to weigh it much more heavily than the others, but sometimes the body of work seems to indicate it doesn't capture the whole story. Jon Mick is a good example.

So you could have added say 65 WAR to your list of automatic numbers, and I would have still said "no".

Truth be told, I don't want Dempsey to get to 3000 hits. I don't want to have to think about his HOF case. Because like Wilson, Dempsey is an all time terrible defender. It destroys his WAR totals. He is a very good (not elite) OBP guy for a corner OF. He was a doubles and steals machine for a large portion of his career. He was an elite average hitter.

But for four of his 12 years of his playing career (not counting this year) he was a below average to replacement level player. I do not really think that for more than maybe 2-3 seasons I ever considered him one of the top corner OF's in the game. The best metric we have for rating all around play (WAR) says he is not even close to hall of fame candidacy. This isn't just his defense. If you add the 10 wins his glove has cost him, he's only at 40 or so WAR through his age 32 season, which is below HOF trajectory. The other factor is that he just doesn't hit homers. You don't have to be a slugger to get into the hall, but it makes it tough when you just don't hit any. He might not get 60 for his career. That's tough in a corner OF spot, doubles aside.

But still you have all the above accolades about him. And 3000 hits with one franchise is a big deal. So I don't want Dempsey to get to 3000 hits, because I have absolutely no idea what to do with him.
Ted Schmidt
Twin Cities Typing Nightmares(2044-present)
California Crusaders (2021-2038)
Image

User avatar
RonCo
GB: JL Frontier Division Director
Posts: 19807
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:48 pm
Has thanked: 1981 times
Been thanked: 2901 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by RonCo » Sat Apr 20, 2019 12:46 pm

Dempsey may or may not be the perfect case to say there is no "automatic" anything. That said, OOTP does occasionally make for some interesting outlier players--especially back in the old day with the first rating system. (I remember a great power a mega-power hitter named Darrel Stowers in the old FOBL who hit something close to 600 Homers and did almost nothing else other than play defense that was just good enough to stay in the league--he didn't make the Hall in that league because, in reality, there are no "automatics"). Guys like Dempster represent little warps in the space-time continuum of OOTP that you either love or hate. They are reminders that we're playing in a universe that is just a little cattywampus to ours.

As a general rule, though, both in our real world and in OOTP big counting numbers when applied to careers are pretty decent indicators of value. It's the outliers that make the spice of life.

In today's BBA, for example, you're probably not going to find a guy who has 250 wins and is undeserving of induction. Mons Raider's steals are almost a lock as far as I'm concerned (others will disagree). Emilio Morales's homers are an interesting case--he's got prodigious power, but they come in a total band-box. How much do we remember the effect a player's ballpark had on his numbers (the story of the Phillies' Chuck Klein again comes to mind in real baseball)?

Regardless, among the many symptoms of this league being so fantastic is the passion its GMs bring to questions like this.
GM: Bikini Krill
Nothing Matters But the Pacific Pennant
Roster

User avatar
RonCo
GB: JL Frontier Division Director
Posts: 19807
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:48 pm
Has thanked: 1981 times
Been thanked: 2901 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by RonCo » Sat Apr 20, 2019 12:50 pm

I think it's interesting that strikeouts are not considered big by voters. I'm not sure what it says, but it is interesting. My first reaction is that in the earliest days of all online OOTP leagues, the injury code was so weak that _most_ decent starters could build careers long enough to drop bigger K totals, so they aren't as awe-inspiring. This would say that these days pitcher's careers are shorter on average, which would make it harder to achieve those totals.

Perhaps, then, this is another interesting twist in long-running leagues like ours. Is it harder for a starter to get in today because pitchers in the old days have bigger counting numbers?
GM: Bikini Krill
Nothing Matters But the Pacific Pennant
Roster

User avatar
7teen
BBA GM
Posts: 9806
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 7:59 am
Has thanked: 223 times
Been thanked: 1135 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by 7teen » Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:09 pm

Honestly Dempsey (and to a lesser degree Rhodes) is why I started the discussion. Just to see what people's perceptions are. I feel like there is a solid base of GMs that say yes, some of these numbers are HOF worthy despite what the advanced metrics say and then there are those that disagree.

As a guy who loves counting stats and using only Dempsey as a case, if he sort of levels off and ends at 3,000 hits, 600 doubles, and 900 stolen bases I couldn't say no. Even if his WAR says 30.0 when he retires.
Last edited by 7teen on Tue Apr 23, 2019 9:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
Chris Wilson

LB Surfers 95-96
FL Pac Champs: 95

Madison Wolves 99-2039
JL MW: 99-2009, 17, 20, 21
JL WC: 12
JL: 01, 04, 09, 12
FL Heartland: 32
FL WC: 31, 33
BBA Champs: 04, 09

Portland Lumberjacks 2040-
FL Pacific: 50
FL WC: 49, 51
FL Champs: 49, 51

Vic Caleca TN of the Year 2046

User avatar
7teen
BBA GM
Posts: 9806
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 7:59 am
Has thanked: 223 times
Been thanked: 1135 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by 7teen » Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:15 pm

RonCo wrote:
Sat Apr 20, 2019 12:50 pm
I think it's interesting that strikeouts are not considered big by voters. I'm not sure what it says, but it is interesting. My first reaction is that in the earliest days of all online OOTP leagues, the injury code was so weak that _most_ decent starters could build careers long enough to drop bigger K totals, so they aren't as awe-inspiring. This would say that these days pitcher's careers are shorter on average, which would make it harder to achieve those totals.

Perhaps, then, this is another interesting twist in long-running leagues like ours. Is it harder for a starter to get in today because pitchers in the old days have bigger counting numbers?
The pitching side has always been an odd vote. I think in large part due to the differences in the eras of the league between when pitchers dominated and when hitters did. Hard to distinguish the pitchers over the eras.

I feel a guy like Sammy Bodeen should be in the hall of fame. He has the 4th most strikeouts and has the 17th most wins in league history (has a lot of Ls too).

But then again, there is also a pitcher with a 92.4 WAR and 91.1 WAR not in the hall either because they pitched during a time when pitchers dominated I suppose.
Chris Wilson

LB Surfers 95-96
FL Pac Champs: 95

Madison Wolves 99-2039
JL MW: 99-2009, 17, 20, 21
JL WC: 12
JL: 01, 04, 09, 12
FL Heartland: 32
FL WC: 31, 33
BBA Champs: 04, 09

Portland Lumberjacks 2040-
FL Pacific: 50
FL WC: 49, 51
FL Champs: 49, 51

Vic Caleca TN of the Year 2046

User avatar
RonCo
GB: JL Frontier Division Director
Posts: 19807
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:48 pm
Has thanked: 1981 times
Been thanked: 2901 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by RonCo » Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:21 pm

Part of the question is (as always) what you see the Hall of Fame as being.

There are players that everyone sees as automatics. The other guys need something more the further away they get.
GM: Bikini Krill
Nothing Matters But the Pacific Pennant
Roster

User avatar
RonCo
GB: JL Frontier Division Director
Posts: 19807
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:48 pm
Has thanked: 1981 times
Been thanked: 2901 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by RonCo » Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:30 pm

7teen wrote:
Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:15 pm

The pitching side has always been an odd vote. I think in large part due to the differences in the eras of the league between when pitchers dominated and when hitters did. Hard to distinguish the pitchers over the eras.

I feel a guy like Sammy Bodeen should be in the hall of fame. He has the 4th most strikeouts and has the 17th most wins in league history (has a lot of Ls too).

But then again, there is also a pitcher with a 92.4 WAR and 91.1 WAR not in the hall either because they pitched during a time when pitchers dominated I suppose.
Like the "real Hall," I think there are a lot of moving parts to induction. The GM pool changes (like the BBWA voters change), and the players change--the game itself in the case of OOTP and the environment around it in the case of real baseball, and the way we think of effective players changes. There's also the whole issue of how we view defense, and whether an elite defensive player belongs in the Hall of Fame even if their offensive numbers are lower...catchers in particular are subject to this one--WAR is shit at capturing catcher defense, and yet at the elite level it's arguably one of the more valuable commodities in existence. Shortstop is, of course, also one of those positions.
GM: Bikini Krill
Nothing Matters But the Pacific Pennant
Roster

User avatar
RonCo
GB: JL Frontier Division Director
Posts: 19807
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:48 pm
Has thanked: 1981 times
Been thanked: 2901 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by RonCo » Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:37 pm

But I do like to think about the injury model in OOTP, because it's one of the things that's changed the most over the years.

Our GMs (like those in all online leagues) like to try to say the actual development model changes--and it does, but really only in little tweaks. But over a decade of OOTP versions, the development model and player model is really pretty similar. What's different is the injury model--which, in my opinion, shapes career paths far more than the development model...which, also in my opinion, is considerably more realistic and fun today than tn years ago. In the old days (he says, kicking a dog off his lawn), if you had a solid pitcher, he was going to throw for fifteen years and pick up 2,000-2,500 strike outs pretty much guaranteed. In today's BBA, I'd be unwilling to lay serious money on guys early in their careers.

That said, I do think our aging modifiers may be messing with this, too...regardless, the way that Hall voters look at players also depends on the players who are playing in the era they play in. Durability is a bigger deal today. Put another way: perhaps 2,500Ks in today's world means more than 2,500Ks used to.
GM: Bikini Krill
Nothing Matters But the Pacific Pennant
Roster

Ted
Ex-GM
Posts: 5630
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:50 pm
Has thanked: 368 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by Ted » Sat Apr 20, 2019 4:41 pm

7teen wrote:
Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:15 pm
RonCo wrote:
Sat Apr 20, 2019 12:50 pm
I think it's interesting that strikeouts are not considered big by voters. I'm not sure what it says, but it is interesting. My first reaction is that in the earliest days of all online OOTP leagues, the injury code was so weak that _most_ decent starters could build careers long enough to drop bigger K totals, so they aren't as awe-inspiring. This would say that these days pitcher's careers are shorter on average, which would make it harder to achieve those totals.

Perhaps, then, this is another interesting twist in long-running leagues like ours. Is it harder for a starter to get in today because pitchers in the old days have bigger counting numbers?
The pitching side has always been an odd vote. I think in large part due to the differences in the eras of the league between when pitchers dominated and when hitters did. Hard to distinguish the pitchers over the eras.

I feel a guy like Sammy Bodeen should be in the hall of fame. He has the 4th most strikeouts and has the 17th most wins in league history (has a lot of Ls too).

But then again, there is also a pitcher with a 92.4 WAR and 91.1 WAR not in the hall either because they pitched during a time when pitchers dominated I suppose.
The big swing in eras are huge. I agree. WAR does adjust for that though to some degree. And those 90 WAR pitchers should be in. 90 WAR is an incredible amount. I think that might be more related to the fact that we've had a very strict voting mechanism at times, and a much easier one at others. But I love talking about this stuff. And I honestly don't know what to do with Dempster. Totals like his "shouldn't" happen. The hits and doubles and steals are amazing. But there's lots of other numbers that say he just wasn't that good. I just don't think it happens in real baseball.

Defense is managed in very odd ways in video games. We don't actually have to watch these guys screw it up, so we run out players that would never, ever get the starts they would in real life. That doesn't mean we're wrong. It just means actual fans have a lower tolerance for visibly bad play than virtual GMs who don't have to watch it or get fan feedback. A perfect example of this in real life is current Cardinal Jose Martinez. The guy has slashed .310/.370/.470 in his big league career, and no one wants him playing in right field. He's Dempster level bad there. It's unwatchable. Even though we still may be better off doing that, it's just so aesthetically unpleasant no one will tolerate it.

But in video game baseball that doesn't happen. The other extreme happens too. We play guys with no bat at all who have incredible gloves, because while we don't like the .180/.290/.320 line, we don't actually have to watch the guy go be completely hopeless with the bat and don't "see" him kill rally after rally.

In both those cases, a more well rounded player would be superior, but both types of players often provide value better than our next alternative. However, in real life, neither would be allowed to play.

I'd feel really weird not voting for Dempster if he ends up with the totals you mentioned. I don't want to have to make that decision.
Ted Schmidt
Twin Cities Typing Nightmares(2044-present)
California Crusaders (2021-2038)
Image

User avatar
RonCo
GB: JL Frontier Division Director
Posts: 19807
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:48 pm
Has thanked: 1981 times
Been thanked: 2901 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by RonCo » Sat Apr 20, 2019 4:49 pm

Ted wrote:
Sat Apr 20, 2019 4:41 pm
And those 90 WAR pitchers should be in. 90 WAR is an incredible amount.
Agree.
But I love talking about this stuff.
:)
Defense is managed in very odd ways in video games. We don't actually have to watch these guys screw it up, so we run out players that would never, ever get the starts they would in real life. That doesn't mean we're wrong. It just means actual fans have a lower tolerance for visibly bad play than virtual GMs who don't have to watch it or get fan feedback. A perfect example of this in real life is current Cardinal Jose Martinez. The guy has slashed .310/.370/.470 in his big league career, and no one wants him playing in right field. He's Dempster level bad there. It's unwatchable. Even though we still may be better off doing that, it's just so aesthetically unpleasant no one will tolerate it.
Yes. I'm interested to see how simply reporting the number of plays above and below average teams are will change the reports. Us GMs often can't get a feel for how bad "bad" really is because we can't watch it and because we have almost no real measures (ZR is ... um ... imprecise). After this year, I'll have three seasons of information to compare how GM behavior might have changed. :)
But in video game baseball that doesn't happen. The other extreme happens too. We play guys with no bat at all who have incredible gloves, because while we don't like the .180/.290/.320 line, we don't actually have to watch the guy go be completely hopeless with the bat and don't "see" him kill rally after rally.
To be fair, online league teams are also run by humans who (1) have variable time, and (2) sometimes let their team run a little loose just because once the season is "over" it's just as easy to leave it be. To us there's sometimes not much difference between a 78 win season and a 72 win season.
I'd feel really weird not voting for Dempster if he ends up with the totals you mentioned. I don't want to have to make that decision.
On the whole, yes.
GM: Bikini Krill
Nothing Matters But the Pacific Pennant
Roster

User avatar
ae37jr
BBA GM
Posts: 2980
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 1:37 pm
Location: Davenport, FL
Has thanked: 40 times
Been thanked: 645 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by ae37jr » Sat Apr 20, 2019 6:14 pm

Ted wrote:
Sat Apr 20, 2019 4:41 pm
A perfect example of this in real life is current Cardinal Jose Martinez. The guy has slashed .310/.370/.470 in his big league career, and no one wants him playing in right field. He's Dempster level bad there. It's unwatchable. Even though we still may be better off doing that, it's just so aesthetically unpleasant no one will tolerate it.
That guy is a terrible right fielder. I watched the game last night and he must have had 10 balls hit to him. He had no clue which way break and almost looked scared. Even the ones he caught were an adventure. The whole time I was thinking about some of the BBA people I have sbuck in the outfield to get more offense in the lineup and how that's probably what they looked like.
Alan Ehlers
GM of the Twin Cities River Monster
Image

agrudez
Ex-GM
Posts: 7681
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:30 am
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by agrudez » Mon Apr 22, 2019 1:01 pm

7teen wrote:
Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:32 am
Here's a follow up on how these stats look in our league...

...

But up to this point, it appears that as a league we have voted guys in who have reached most of these milestones with the exception of strikeouts.
That's correlation, not causation.
League Director: Kyle “agrudez” Stever*
*Also serves as chief muckraker
-Ron, 2025 media guide

Image

Bumstead
Ex-GM
Posts: 1186
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 9:06 pm
Has thanked: 96 times
Been thanked: 45 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by Bumstead » Mon Apr 22, 2019 1:31 pm

Is there really an argument on here about Ryan Dempster in relation to the HOF?

Ted
Ex-GM
Posts: 5630
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:50 pm
Has thanked: 368 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: What Stats Are Automatic?

Post by Ted » Mon Apr 22, 2019 1:39 pm

Bumstead wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 1:31 pm
Is there really an argument on here about Ryan Dempster in relation to the HOF?
Reason number one a guy shouldn't get in the hall, we've been calling him the wrong name.
Ted Schmidt
Twin Cities Typing Nightmares(2044-present)
California Crusaders (2021-2038)
Image

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “League Polls”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests